While using the internet, the questions of self, community and global identity all come into play. Any user of the internet is able to display themselves in whatever ways they so choose. Because of this, questions arise as to whether an online identity and community can actually be considered legitimate? Also, credibility becomes a big question when answering, “Who are we when we are online?” (Lister 167).
For a sense of self, one has to think in terms of what shapes an identity in general. Martin Lister explains that media forms are a part of “an active process of identity construction” where individuals display themselves due to how media technologies have shaped their lives (Lister 245). For example, the use of acronyms is now a common practice in normal language and used as expressions of youth an hip terminology. The computer has already shaped lives offline in such ways as speech, dress and emotion to the point where it becomes contradicting to be non-accepting of such a thing as online identity. Before the invention of the internet, people’s identities were always being influenced by means of media sources. Individuals would walk, talk and dress like what they saw or heard on television, radio and newspapers. What would be the difference in shaping of identity and how identity is expressed before as compared to how the internet shapes identities now?
For starters, a person must think about the concept of credibility and legitimacy. In the online world, self identity is only thought of from the typed word. Because there is no actual physical contact, there is no definite way of knowing the true identity of a person. An internet user may be chatting with someone online they believe to be a man because they claim to be one and in actuality be talking to a 10 year old girl. Similarly, Facebook profile pictures can display images of a person at their best and what they looked like 10 years ago as almost a false advertising of who they really are and what their physical appearance is presently. Lister raises the question of identity and community in a virtual and online world by asking, “Can communities be separate from physical location?” (Lister 173). If a person is who they are based on their actual identity, how can they be the same person online? Being online and having an identity there raises too many ‘what if’ questions.
On the other hand, the same could be thought of in a physical sense. How many people actually know a person and their true identity? What is the difference between when a person creates a profile online that leaves out details of their physical and personal identity and when a person in a physical world puts makeup on to cover up blemishes on their face? Both are a type of masking of a person; however, in the virtual world it can be done easier and to a greater extent.
Martin Lister and Henry Jenkins both see the virtual world and identities online as being one of questions. Is there such thing as a community or actual identity if there is no physical contact between individuals? Some think that an exchange of ideas is all that is needed to be part of a community. Others think that an identity can be expressed online the same way people try to shape their identities offline: by transforming oneself to be how they want to be. The difference in the real and virtual world identities and communities becomes one of ease. Is an online identity not legitimate because it is easier to recreate than an offline identity? As long as the physical and virtual worlds do not cross, there should be no problem.
links:
3 responses so far ↓
Charlena Cleveland // October 13, 2008 at 9:18 pm
You purpose a good question: “What is the difference between when a person creates a profile online that leaves out details of their physical and personal identity and when a person in a physical world puts makeup on to cover up blemishes on their face?”
It is true..how many of us really do know others true identities, even when meeting them face-to-face. Though it is easier to not be misled, we still have to sort out the “is” information given to us towards the “oughts”.
phonytruth // October 13, 2008 at 9:21 pm
Interesting. I think that you hit the nail on the head regarding the fact that their is no solid definitive answer about whether an “online community” is in fact a community. I think a good argument could be made for saying it is authentic. It serves much of the same purpose, allowing people to interact and communicate in groups. The idea that we have fluid and transforming identities is also very true in real life as well as on the internet. I guess it proves that are ways of thinking about ourselves is constantly changing. Peace.
Monica Cirje // October 13, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Hi there,
I really liked your blog. You do make some good points, especially when you point out that many people hide their identities both in the physical world and online, making it thus difficult to know who they trully are.
While I belive it to be true that a person’s online identiy is thought of through the typed word and therefore there is no definite way to know that perso’n true identity, I have to point out that this statement is a bit too general. We can get a good idea about a person’s true identity depending on the space we navigate. For example, there are news groups where users chose to identify temselves for the purpose of expressing a credible point of view. Also, as I pointed out in my blog, there have been numerous reaserch that relates the typed language to gender or race. This reaserch suggests that women are more inclined to write shorter messages, be more polite and use less profanity than a male user. It is not to say that these facts apply to everyone, but overall there is close correlation between langage and one’s gender.
Overall i believe that a person can be himself/herself both online and in real life but there are a few people out there condifent enough to do that.